This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration.Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here

Why It Makes More Sense to Dump Your Fossil Fuel Stocks

Conspicuously missing from the lineup of current and potential divestors are those large green groups that are sounding some of the loudest warning cries about climate change.

An
article by Naomi Klein in
The Nation last spring revealed that a majority of large environmental nonprofits are suspected or known to have large investments in the fossil fuel industry. The Nature Conservancy, for instance, has at least $22.8 million invested in the energy sector. Other groups with large endowments include Conservation International, the Wildlife Conservation Society and the Ocean Conservancy. None of these groups have been forthright about what percentage of their endowments are derived from or invested in fossil fuels.

On the other end of the spectrum, green groups such as Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Rainforest Action Network do not have endowments and do not invest in the stock market. And other groups are taking steps to make sure their actions are more consistent with their mission. The Natural Resources Defense Council has stated that it specifically screens out the extractive and fossil fuel industry for direct investments, as does the Sierra Club.

The executive director of the Responsible Endowments Coalition, David Apfel, told
The Nation that unless an institution specifically screens out investments in fossil fuels, it is virtually certain to hold some stock in the industry.

"All investors are basically invested in fossil fuels," Apfel says. "You can't be an investor that is not invested in fossil fuels unless you've actually worked very hard to ensure that you're not."

All three not only outline methods for long-term divestment, but also offer suggestions for reinvestment in renewable energy and other solutions for coping with climate change, which they all conclude is a necessary component of any successful divestment strategy.

The Aperio Group reported in January that carbon divestment carries very little risk -- much less than 1% (from 0.01 to 0.0006). At the same time, the World Economic Forum found that about $700 billion would be needed annually to address and limit the global impacts of climate change.

Divestments in fossil fuel stocks owned by university, nonprofit and corporate endowments -- as well as those in pension funds -- would free up hundreds of billions to tens of trillions of dollars that could be redirected to sustainable development and climate adaptation projects. This could help prevent or alleviate many of the worst impacts of climate change while also benefitting the economy.

"A carbon-neutral, and eventually carbon-free, economy is not only possible," Yonavjak writes, "it has become imperative."